The opportunity cost of the lie of AGW is in the $trillions. That is money which could have provided energy to Africa, built a research post on the Moon and placed satellites in orbit sufficient to protect Earth from a real potential environmental disaster, asteroid strikes.

Instead we have had the egos of shonks, 3rd rate scientists and the monstrous ambitions of an unelected corrupt bureaucracy, the UN, catered for by this vast waste of money.

And yet not one of the leading exponents of this lie has yet been prosecuted.

It is extraordinary how much space OLO gives to views such as the ones expressed in this article. One has to assume that the editor shares Tony Abbott's well known dislike of and disregard for, scientific evidence. The science relating to climate change is well established and shared by 97% of the world's climate scientists. Yet the remaining 3% are given undue prominence, not only in OLO but also in the ignorant rantings of radio 'shock jocks', The Australian newspaper and its stablemates, and elsewhere.

Just to take one example of the consistent misrepresentation found in this anti-science propaganda. The author states "Yet, contrary to IPCC forecasts, global temperatures have actually plateaued over the past 17 years despite a rise in CO2 of about 8%. "

That is simply untrue. It reflects the author's bias as to how he defines "global temperature", which is the commonly misunderstood measure of global surface temperatures. They account for only 2% of the earth's warming. More importantly, the planet has continued to accumulate heat at a rate equivalent to four Hiroshima bomb detonations per second over the past 15 years (Nuccitelli 2014).

As to the role of human behaviour in that warming, the IPCC stated that the best estimate is that humans caused 100% of the global warming over the past 60 years. It follows that if we wish to modify that impact we have to modify the behaviour that causes the change. The overwhelming evidence for that change is the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Part of the tragedy for Australia is that tonight's Budget will probably reinforce the anti-science approach of this singularly dangerous government.

James slinks in and quotes the lie of the 97% consensus thoroughly discredited:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-013-9647-9

And then sinks further by quoting Nuccitelli and the despicable Hiroshima analogy. This analogy was first used by Sandiford who is taken to task here:

http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/agw-lies-hiroshima-and-academics.html

Jo takes the ridiculous atom bomb analogy apart here:

http://joannenova.com.au/2013/12/sun-dumps-500-times-as-many-hiroshima-bombs-of-energy-as-climate-change/

The scare-mongering of the alarmists is not just absurd it is pernicious and has cost our community and the world a great deal.

The evil of wasted intelligence is perhaps greater than the trillions wasted by global warming alarmism. Seeing many of the world's nicest people completely taken in has been very sad; seeing the herd mind of multi-degreed people prevent them displaying rational skepticism is just so sad.

The vicious dishonesty of much 'global warming' writing is terrible; ad hominem disguised as argument; argument from authority disguised as science; and circular reasoning finally preventing any escape for the sufferer. James, get help.

Tulip mania is not over for many; to do real science now would undermine their self-concept. Rational people should keep their powder dry, as desperation will cause ever more irrational attempts to proselytise and coerce the community.

James
It is typical of the climate terrorists to set out to attack those who hold different opinions to themselves.

You started your post with an unfounded attack on people and organisations that promote the publication of a wide range of views.

Why can't you terrorists accept your views are now those of minority. To be consistant shouldn't you apply your own argument about an overwhelming consensus? After all you are not a climate scientist, you are merely another unqualified commentator.

By all means, don't believe the reality of global warming, but after reading the following link, go and buy a snorkel and flippers http://m.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/west-antarctic-ice-sheet-melt-unstoppable-pushing-sea-levels-higher-scientists-say-20140513-386en.html.

The evidence is in front of us. The agenda however, is to continue using fossil fuels, and since government taxes on fuel add up to about 60% of the price of fuel at the bowser, has a larger vested interest than the oil companies. Go figure, that government doesn't want to acknowledge global warming.